Log in

User Name

Password

Remember Me?

Lost Password Recovery Form

If you have forgotten your username or password, you can request to have your username emailed to you and to reset your password. When you fill in your registered email address, you will be sent instructions on how to reset your password.

anyone can repeat his experiments and find the same results. intelligent slugs from planet X would still agree with maxwells laws. thats fundamentally different from a "logic of aesthetics." have you ever seen an intelligent slugs wife/mother? its not pretty.

you realise the only person your extremely literal 'every picture must be of something, like a tree or a person' approach is cheating is you right?

I see your point, but I'm open to abstract expressionism. It just has to be well crafted and creative. I enjoy cool patterns, mark making, raw composition and design aesthetics. I will admit I bias toward graphic design in that department when looking for inspirato. Which is derived from Rothko and friends.

I guess I didnt understand your analogy Kev, it sounded like you were saying aesthetics are in some way universal in the same way the relationships codified in maxwells equations are.. and that modern arts attempts to defy or subvert those conventions was in fact just extending the language with which they were expressed.
which i disagree with, aesthetics are value judgments of clever monkey brains, not laws.

"I see your point, but I'm open to abstract expressionism. It just has to be well crafted and creative. "

Rothkos are crafted beautifully, theyre strange, they seem to have 3d depth, the colours are rich and bold. they seem to carry a brooding presence. theyre amazingly powerful artefacts that tower over you like monoliths in the literal, stone sense, and show you art doesnt have to be easy or immediately satisfying. they ask more questions than they answer. their apparent crudity doesnt fight with the beauty of a velasquez or tischen, it compliments them.

i think they occupy as important a place in the ecosystem of ideas that is art as any mannered delicate masterpiece.

I guess I didnt understand your analogy Kev, it sounded like you were saying aesthetics are in some way universal in the same way the relationships codified in maxwells equations are.. and that modern art was attempts to defy or subvert those conventions was in fact just extending the language with which they were expressed.
which i disagree with, aesthetics are value judgments of clever monkey brains, not laws.

"Among other wrongful acts, the gallery had been filtering payments for Rothko's works through accounts in Switzerland and Liechtenstein as part of an effort to ensure the paintings were undervalued during Rothko's lifetime — in the 1960s this led the artist to vastly underestimate the value of his works...The trial record revealed that the gallery had been stockpiling the undervalued works instead of selling them in order to ensure both a low market saturation and a high Marlborough inventory, anticipating a heightened value in the market after Rothko's death"

Hey Smilechild is there any chance you could dial back the relentless spite just once?
whatever's wrong with you, its not my fault.

"Fact: you were garbling it up."

"There's a logic to how the various value-charged words bandied about in these conversations held meaning within the context of aesthetic philosophy. Agreeing with that logic is not a belief in the same sense that one might believe in an ideology. This is like saying that Maxwell's equations are opinions. The modernist attempt to transcend the logics of aesthetics only changed how most people understand the words used. Not their referents. This linguistic revolution allowed created objects to be called by names that were previously understood to be inapplicable"

Im sure thats clear as crystal to everyone except slow readers like me, but what does it actually mean? That was all I was trying to get out of you in the first place before you began your customary hatred-filled dispiriting mockery schtick.